Successful technology firms hire people to find things wrong with their product. These individuals are rewarded for finding things that are wrong, and fired for not finding them. Verification people have completely different motivations and a different set of objectives from developers.
By contrast, academic research is a disaster, because they rely on pal-review. Everyone has basically the same objectives, and rely on the same sources of income. This guarantees that no serious problem will ever be found which could threaten the broad base of funding.
When I hear people using the terms “peer-review” and “climate science” in the same sentence, I feel like busting out laughing. It is a joke.